Poetic Panentheism?

I believe translations often get colored by the worldview of the translator.
However, I don't see any panentheism in the original text (and context).
But it's no big deal for me if some Zoroastrians regard themselves as Panentheists. It makes things more complicated for them (since this is still a form of dualism) but that's their problem and no big deal for me.
And as a poetic addition to my pantheism, I would be happy to describe myself as a poetic panentheist!
Ushta
Alexander

2009/5/5 Special Kain

I agree. I don't think that there's anything beyond time, space and change, either. There is only one world, and we're a part of it. But some translations of the Gathas suggest that Zarathushtra was speaking to someone or something beyond this world, locating the cause beyond the realm of effects.

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Di, 5.5.2009:


Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: [Ushta] Gathas: Song 4 - Stanza 8
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009, 15:34

This is if we assume that Zarathushtra really was a panentheist.
I accept that some Zoroastrians think he was, as a matter of belief. But I'm personally a pantheist and a Zoroastrian pantheist too. The author of The Gathas is a pantheist to me.
Ushta
Alexander

2009/5/5 Special Kain



Dear friends,

Maybe I didn't fully understand, but the panentheistic idea of Ahura Mazda (who now happens to be the universe-at- large plus SOMETHING beyond it) seems to be the BIRTH of metaphysics: thinking of something that's beyond space, time and change. Because the deities prior to Zarathushtra's reformulations were one and the same with the changes they effected. The God of, say, the oceans was embedded within them, not some being living separately from them. In this sense Zarathushtra was, by locating Ahura Mazda both within and beyond this world, the first metaphysician, but I could be totally wrong about this.

Ushta,
Dino


--- Alexander Bard schrieb am So, 3.5.2009:


Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: [Ushta] Gathas: Song 4 - Stanza 8
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
CC: "Zoroastrian Friends" , "Zoroastrians"
Datum: Sonntag, 3. Mai 2009, 15:57

Dear Parviz, Zaneta, Friends
The Universe itself is beyond time and age.
Time is merely an aspect, a dimension, of the spacetime of The Universe. For example, when traveling at the speed of light (which photons do), time stops completely.
So we don't need Ahura Mazda to be outside of The Universe to be one and the same as The Universe = monism.
I don't understand "the first and the latest" translation though. Would not "the first and the last" make better sense, as this so obviously refers to a metaphor for that which is beyond time? "Latest" assumes there is still something else to come, afterwards.. .
Ushta
Alexander